Cluster headache polygenetic risk and known functional variants of CYP3A4 are not associated with treatment response

Cluster Headache and Migraine Shared and Unique Insights: Neurophysiological Implications, Neuroimaging, and Biomarkers: A Comprehensive Review

Migraine headache (MH) and cluster headache (CH) are debilitating primary headache disorders that impose a significant global burden. While they share certain clinical features, such as unilateral pain and autonomic dysfunction, their underlying pathophysiological mechanisms remain distinct. Advances in the understanding of neurophysiological features, such as neuroimaging and biomarker research, have provided critical insights into both their overlapping and divergent characteristics. Neurophysiological research has revealed differences in nociceptive processing, cortical excitability, and sensory integration, underscoring the complexity of these conditions. Neuroimaging studies reveal common activation patterns within pain-processing networks, including the trigeminal system and hypothalamus, while highlighting key differences, such as hypothalamic hyperactivity in CH and cortical alterations in MH. Additionally, biomarker research has identified shared elements, including elevated calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), yet distinct variations in its regulation and genetic predispositions. Genome-wide association studies have further elucidated the genetic architecture of these disorders, uncovering susceptibility loci that reinforces their unique yet occasionally intersecting genetic foundations. These multifield advancements not only enhance the understanding of MH and CH pathophysiology but also pave the way for improved diagnostic precision, personalized therapeutic strategies, and future research.

From Tics to Stabs: Renaming Cluster Tics in Cluster Headache-A Cross-Sectional Study

BACKGROUND

Short-lasting paroxysms of facial pain in patients with cluster headache have traditionally been called "cluster tics." Mostly described as co-occurring trigeminal neuralgia, they remain to be explored as an independent phenomenon. We investigated the prevalence of cluster tics in cluster headache, the clinical differentiation from trigeminal neuralgia, and propose a distinct definition and renaming of cluster tics.

METHODS

We conducted a retrospective, controlled, cross-sectional study using semi-structured interviews of patients with cluster headache at the Danish Headache Center. A comparator cohort of patients with trigeminal neuralgia was included from a previous study. We investigated the lifetime prevalence of cluster tics in the cluster headache group and characterized them according to duration, location, pain-intensity, triggerability, and serial occurrence.

RESULTS

We included 424 participants with cluster headache (median age 52 years (IQR: 32-72), male-female ratio 3:2) and 576 participants with trigeminal neuralgia (median age 72 years (IQR: 50-94), male-female ratio 1:3). Cluster tics were reported by 200 (47%) cluster headache participants with higher odds for participants of female sex (OR: 1.94, 95% CI: 1.27-2.96, p = 0.002) and participants with chronic cluster headache (OR: 1.74, 95% CI: 1.15-2.63, p = 0.008). Unlike trigeminal neuralgia, cluster tics were not triggerable (OR: 0.02, 95% CI: 0.01-0.04, p < 2e-16) and presented with pain restricted to the first trigeminal division.

CONCLUSIONS

Cluster tics are prevalent in nearly half of patients with cluster headache, associated to female sex and chronic phenotype. Unlike trigeminal neuralgia, cluster tics occur in the orbital region and are largely non-triggerable. To improve terminology, we propose renaming cluster tics to "cluster stabs."

Genomics and pharmacogenomics of cluster headache: implications for personalized management? A systematic review

The role of genetic factors in cluster headache etiology, suggested by familial and twin studies, remains ill-defined, with the exact pathophysiological mechanisms still largely elusive. This systematic review aims to synthesize current knowledge on cluster headache genetics and explore its implications for personalized treatment and prediction of treatment response. Thus, we searched PubMed, Scopus, and the Cochrane Library databases and reference lists of identified research articles, meta-analyses, and reviews to identify relevant studies up to 10 July 2024. The quality of the evidence was assessed using Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for case control studies and NIH Quality Assessment tool for Observational Cohort and Cross-Sectional Studies. The protocol of this study was registered via the Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/cd4s3 ). Fifty-one studies were selected for the qualitative synthesis: 34 candidate gene studies, 5 GWAS, 7 gene expression studies, 4 pharmacogenetic association studies, and 1 whole genome sequencing study. The bulk of genetic evidence in cluster headache underscores the involvement of genes associated with chronobiological regulation. The most studied gene in cluster headache is the HCRTR2 , which is expressed in the hypothalamus; however, findings across studies continue to be inconclusive. Recent GWAS have uncovered novel risk loci for cluster headache, marking a significant advancement for the field. Nevertheless, there remains a need to investigate various genes involved in specific mechanisms and pathways.

Recent advances in diagnosing, managing, and understanding the pathophysiology of cluster headache

Cluster headache, characterised by attacks of severe, recurrent, unilateral headache and ipsilateral cranial autonomic symptoms, remains a primary headache with an elusive pathophysiology. Recent advances have introduced effective treatments and broadened understanding of the clinical features of cluster headache. These features are similar in patients globally, but regional differences in prevalence and burden exist. International collaborations have led to identification of eight genetic loci associated with cluster headache. The pathophysiological mechanisms are still not fully understood but recent studies show that targeting the trigeminal autonomic reflex by neurostimulation, or targeting the neuropeptide calcitonin gene-related peptide (CGRP), might lessen the attack burden. The US Food and Drug Administration has approved galcanezumab, a monoclonal antibody targeting CGRP, as the first specific preventive treatment for episodic cluster headache. However, a preventive effect was not replicated in chronic cluster headache, and the European Medicines Agency did not approve galcanezumab, restricting its availability in Europe. Owing to the low prevalence of cluster headache, continued collaboration through multicentre clinical trials and data sharing will be imperative for further breakthroughs in understanding and management.

Genetic and Phenotypic Profiling of Triptan Users in a Swedish Cluster Headache Cohort

Up to 25% of individuals who live with cluster headache (CH), an extremely painful primary headache disorder, do not adequately respond to the first-line treatment, triptans. Studies have indicated that genetic variants can play a role in treatment response. Likewise, differences in clinical characteristics can give clues to mechanisms underlying triptan non-response. Our aim was to investigate five genetic variants previously implicated in triptan response and their relation to triptan usage in our Swedish CH cohort and to investigate potential distinctions in clinical characteristics. 545 CH patients were screened for the genetic variants rs1024905, rs6724624, rs4795541, rs5443, and rs2651899 with a case control design based on triptan usage. Analysis of clinical characteristics was based on self-reported questionnaire data from 893 patients. One genetic variant, rs1024905, was significantly associated with triptan non-usage in CH (Pc = 0.010). In addition, multi-allele effector analysis showed that individuals with a higher number of effector variants were less likely to use triptans (P = 0.007). Analysis of clinical characteristics showed that triptan users were more likely to have alcohol as a trigger (57.4% vs 43.4%, P = 0.002), have autonomic symptoms (95.1% vs 88.1%, P = 0.002), and be current smokers (27.0% vs 21.9%, P = 0.033) compared to non-users. These results support the hypothesis that genetic variants can play a role in triptan usage in CH and that patients with a typical CH phenotype are more likely to use triptans.

Biomarkers in cluster headache: A systematic review

OBJECTIVE

To systematically investigate previously examined biomarkers in blood, urine, cerebrospinal fluid, tear fluid, and saliva of patients with cluster headache.

BACKGROUND

Cluster headache is a condition with extensive clinical challenges in terms of diagnosis and treatment. Identification of a biomarker with diagnostic implications or as a potential treatment target is highly warranted.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review including peer reviewed full text of studies that measured biochemical compounds in either blood, urine, cerebrospinal fluid, tear fluid, or saliva of patients with cluster headache diagnosed after the implementation of the International Classification of Headache Disorders (1988) written in English, Danish, Swedish, or Norwegian. Inclusion required a minimum of five participants. The search was conducted in PubMed and EMBASE, in September 2022, and extracted data were screened by two authors. Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines for reporting systematic reviews were followed. The Newcastle-Ottawa Scale was used to assess the risk of bias in case-controlled studies.

RESULTS

We included 40 studies involving 832 patients with cluster headache and 872 controls, evaluating 80 potential biomarkers. The risk of bias for case-controlled studies was a median of 6 (range: 3-8) and 20 studies out of 40 (50%) were of fair or good quality. Most studies were identified within three groups: hypothalamic-regulated hormones, inflammatory markers, and neuropeptides. Among the hypothalamic hormones, cortisol was the most frequently investigated (N = 7) and was elevated in cluster headache in most of the studies. The most frequently examined inflammatory marker was interleukin 1 (N = 3), but findings were divergent. Calcitonin gene-related peptide was the most investigated neuropeptide (N = 9) and all studies found increased levels during attacks.

CONCLUSION

Biomarker findings have been inconsistent and widely non-specific for cluster headache, which explains why none of the previous studies succeeded in identifying a unique biomarker for cluster headache, but instead contributed to substantiating the underlying pathophysiologic mechanisms. Several of the examined biomarkers could hold promise as markers for disease activity but are unfit for a clear distinction from both controls and other headaches.

Current treatment options for cluster headache: limitations and the unmet need for better and specific treatments-a consensus article

AIM

Treatment for cluster headache is currently based on a trial-and-error approach. The available preventive treatment is unspecific and based on few and small studies not adhering to modern standards. Therefore, the authors collaborated to discuss acute and preventive treatment in cluster headache, addressing the unmet need of safe and tolerable preventive medication from the perspectives of people with cluster headache and society, headache specialist and cardiologist.

FINDINGS

The impact of cluster headache on personal life is substantial. Mean annual direct and indirect costs of cluster headache are more than 11,000 Euros per patient. For acute treatment, the main problems are treatment response, availability, costs and, for triptans, contraindications and the maximum use allowed. Intermediate treatment with steroids and greater occipital nerve blocks are effective but cannot be used continuously. Preventive treatment is sparsely studied and overall limited by relatively low efficacy and side effects. Neurostimulation is a relevant option for treatment-refractory chronic patients. From a cardiologist's perspective use of verapamil and triptans may be worrisome and regular follow-up is essential when using verapamil and lithium.

CONCLUSION

We find that there is a great and unmet need to pursue novel and targeted preventive modalities to suppress the horrific pain attacks for people with cluster headache.